Sorry - I read the 12 December 2011 draft a bit more thoroughly. I see
the spec includes Turtle as optional in section 1.2:
"The document may be published in a number of other RDF serialization
formats, such as N3 [N3] or Turtle [TURTLE]. Any serialisation must be
transformable automatically and in a standard manner to an RDF Graph,
using technologies such as GRDDL [GRDDL-PRIMER]."
But "3.2.4.1 Processing the WebID Profile" does not mention this.
So the immediate question w.r.t Turtle is whether or not to *require* Turtle?
I would suggest yes, for the reasons in my previous email, quoted below...
Thanks
-Patrick
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Patrick Logan <patrickdlogan@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd like to begin a new thread on this list for tracking and closing
> the issue of supporting HTML Microdata. Please put non-specific (i.e.
> not strictly aimed at resolving this issue) in a separate thread with
> a different subject line.
>
> Let's keep this thread short and to the point.
>
> There is an issue on record:
>
> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/track/issues/66
>
> The next tasks toward completion are the following:
>
> a. Spec how a WebID profile graph would look serialised in terms of Microdata
> b. Spec how an application can process RDF/XML _and_ RDFa _and_
> Microdata in a uniform fashion for the basic verification (i.e.,
> public key description)
> c. Spec how an application can process RDF/XML _and_ RDFa _and_
> Microdata in a uniform fashion for arbitrary information, such as
> profile fields (display name, homepage, online accounts, etc.)
>
> * Does anyone disagree that these are the next steps in support of
> HTML Microdata for WebID profiles?
>
> * Does anyone have questions about these tasks?
>
> * Does anyone intend to take these on?
>
> * Is anyone obligated to take these on?
>
> * What happens to Issue 66 if no one moves it forward?
>
> Thanks
> -Patrick